Plan for Annual Meeting
(Some Good Questions to Ask the Board of Directors)
Preface
The Campbell Resources Annual General Meeting is planned for May 23rd,
2007. It will be held in Chibougamau, Quebec, which is a few hundred
miles north of Montreal.
There are many questions raised on this website. The
big picture here is that many shareholders do not believe
these
things are happening by accident. At the same time these
events
are occurring, some prominent Institutions are buying CCH shares (and
even trying to hide their purchases – why would Sprott Asset
Management buy the U.S. symbol?). We also have new reports of
fresh Insider buying. Shareholders are asking if
there is a
connection here.
Questions:
Why has Campbell failed
to adopt a Shareholder Rights Plan, similar to the one that their
partner Nuinsco recently adopted?
Why was this meeting held in Chibougamau, instead of
Montreal? Recent meetings have been held in Montreal. Montreal
is
much more accessible for shareholders, especially shareholders that fly
in from other places. Why
the change of meeting location?
Shareholders have seen no signs that Campbell is taking the promotion
of their own product seriously. In the last 6 months the only
promotion effort that we can see has been to send Alan Blais to the NY
Gold Show. And Campbell didn’t even make sure they
were
listed on the Official Directory for the show.
This apparent failure to promote has come after absolute verbal
commitments for Mr. Fortier (in 2006) that Campbell would start
promoting after they emerge from CCAA. Shareholders are
frustrated with this situation. In another example, Campbell
has
apparently ended their business relationship with Remark, their
Investor Relations Firm. Renmark is no longer listed on the
new
Campbell website.
Can the Board please
comment on their
future plans for company promotion, and commit to an immediate
improvement in this area?
In the Management Discussion and Analysis (recently released) you
revealed that your crews "unexpectedly" discovered high grade gold in
the Joe Mann mine, and had already started extracting this old.
Shareholders believe this to be excellent good news for the
company. We have been told for over year how the outlook for
Joe
Mann was very questionable. And Campbell recently
reported
their plans to close the Joe Mann mine later this year.
Workers
would obviously be affected. Now we see this good news on
these
high grade results.
We have some questions:
How recently was this
high grade gold discovery made?
How did the Joe Mann
exploration drilling miss these high grade veins?
Since Campbell has already started work on extracting gold form these
veins, the company obviously knew about this gold before the NY Gold
Show. How come
there was no press release and no mention of this discovery at the Gold
Show?
Most mining companies would put out a press release to announce a gold
discovery like this. Why has the company failed to do
this?
(One emailed
answer from Mr. Fortier
said that the reason was because it was just a sample. But
the
norm in this industry is to actually announce the results from
sampling, with disclosure that they are sample results.)
In February, Campbell reported a rock fall in the Cooper Rand
mine. A day or two later, Mr. Fortier made some comments top
the
press (as documented in the “Chronicles on the Down Play"
page). Shareholders believe it was wildly inappropriate for
the
CEO to be making these comments.
Does the Board believe
that the press comments made by Mr. Fortier were appropriate and
beneficial to shareholder value?
The process of emerging form CCAA protection has been a long
process. As of Feb 28th, the parent company
(Campbell) has
satisfied all CCAA obligations and has formally announced that they are
“out of CCAA”. But two subsidiary
companies remain
under protection.
Shareholders have been told that the reason was because Campbell
Management is trying to complete bone or two tax deals, as covered in
the Plans of Arrangement. But the process is dragging out
well
beyond the estimates given in late 2006 (the estimate, in
company
press releases, was that everything would be wrapped up by the end of
2006).
Does the Board appreciate
that having
some subsidiaries still under CCAA might be a slightly dark cloud
hanging over the company? Seeing a
positive press
release in this area would be a very positive development, but we see
any rush by Management to get to that point.
With all of these issues wrapped up, Campbell would most certainly have
been able to demand as higher price for those shares in the private
placement that recently closed.
Was getting the best
price highest
possible price for those shares important for the company?
Was
having more funds in the Campbell Treasury important for the company?
Could the Board tell
shareholders
anything about who the buyers of the April private placement
were? Could you answer whether the buyers were good cross
section
of Investors from different firms? Did Insiders participate
in
the private placement?
Does the Board believe
that the share price of the April Private Placement was reasonable and
appropriate?
The “word on the street” is that the placement sold
out in
2 hours. Mr. Fortier’s own emails (as reported on
the
message boards) suggested that the placement sold in a few
days.
Does the Board have any feeling that they could have gotten a high
price for those shares?
Considering the tax advantage, the effective price of those shares was
down around 10 cents a share, well below the recent moving average and
price with volume indicators. No small shareholder reported
any
success at being allowed to buy those shares.
Can the Board honestly
say to shareholders that a "Best Effort" was made to get best price?
These are funds that go directly into the Campbell Treasury.
The
company is now reported a small debenture financing, presumably because
Campbell needs a little more money (or does someone need a few more
shares?).
We understand that Management may want to handle the CCAA Tax
Transactions a certain way. But
does the Board of Directors care that these the "long time it is
taking" issues may possibly be a drag on the CCH stock price?
Initial news suggests that Nuinsco Resource will be a beneficiary of
the upcoming Debenture Financing. The deal would
probably
be more favorable for Nuinsco if the share price is lower. At
the
same time, we do not see clear signs that the company wants a higher
CCH stock price.
Shareholders are
concerned that there may be a Conflict of Interest here. What
does the Board say about this?
Can the Board
please comment on what kind of copper production
costs are expected at the Corner Bay project?
Mr. Fortier has made verbal comments a, and answered emails, where he
has said that costs will be $1.50 - $1.80 per pound. This is
a
very high number given the high grades and shallow depth at Corner
Bay. Shareholders are suspicious that this Cost number may be
deliberately inflated. Can
the Board comment, please?
Campbell is right now working on a new ramp at the Copper Rand
project. In a recent report from the
company,
Management explained that the new ramp was necessary because
of
damage sustained in the rock fall. But in the weeks
following the rock fall, there was never any discussion that the ramp
was damaged. Press releases after the rock fall stated that
“no equipment was damaged”.
So in building the ramp, Campbell has lost another 1+ quarters of
production from Copper Rand. That’s production is
worth
millions of dollars in cash flow, and has resulted in lowered earnings
for the 1st and 2nd quarters.
Can the Board of
Directors say
to shareholders that it was absolutely necessary to build that
ramp at this specific time? Can the Board tell us that it
was
more important to do this work, than it was to receive the operating
income from Copper Rand in this current quarter?
(Possibly
unnecessary work
= depressed earnings = lower share price = low priced private
placement shares = low price for insider buying)
This situation has the appearance that maybe Campbell didn’t
want the earnings coming in, not quite yet. Could the Board confirm or
deny this, please?